Spell Check This!

Why does “one” spell “won” and “through” spell “threw”? If “knight” spells “night” then why doesn’t “tough” rhyme with “bough”? What is this obsession with inconsistent spelling in English? Next time you ask yourself that question (if you still bother to), think how you are yourself implicated in this whole ridiculous waste of time.

Could you tell me the origins of the word?

Most of us have long given up wondering. We enjoy playfully pointing out the various inconsistencies in English spelling. Those who lament them are often the first to correct the spelling mistakes of others. Teachers place an enormous emphasis on them. Students make themselves crazy avoiding them. There are nationwide spelling bees. Thousands of kids divert attention away from meaningful learning and youthful cognitive development to cram for them. Just to spell words correctly.

This would not be an issue if there was a logical consistency to spelling. In French, and most other languages, there are no spelling bees. All words are spelled by a logical set of rules. Each letter makes a sound, and letter combinations make other sounds. In English even our rules don’t make sense. C is a K, but sometimes an S. T is a T but sometimes a SH. Sometimes it makes no sound at all. The list goes on. So long that we don’t even bother with it.

The Turks got it right. In the 1920s, Ataturk the great unifier of the Anatolian people decided to bring his tired, crippled country into the modern age. In an massive campaign, he nationalized the population, banned the veil, enforced new hat laws, and standardized the language. Then, with everyone still gasping stunned and gobsmacked, he boldly announced that everything henceforth would be changed from Arabic script to Latin script, immediately. Phonetically the Arabic script did not suit the Turkish tongue, and Ataturk (who liked all things European) decided the Latin script was more becoming. In order for it to fit the Turkish palette, a strict set of rules had to be established. He wanted to curtail the inefficiencies of the old system (and avoid problems like we have in English). The system that came out of it is so logical and perfect, that we should just go ahead and adopt it too.

Attaturk attending one of his hat-reform engagements

Well that’s all right for the Turks, you might say, but what does that have to do with me? Ataturks reforms probably didn’t come easily. Is it worth it, changing an entire language that, franlkly, hasnt really been standardized in the first place? Ataturk probably had to crack a few heads in the process, and besides, who cares? This is just another creative solution to a problem that doesnt really exist, right?

It will not comfort you to know that the countless annoying anomalies in English spelling are no accident. They were actually placed there on purpose. English, having its roots in so many ancient languages, spanning such a broad range of regional dialects, invaders and adoptions over the centuries has had to cope with its fair share of square pegs and round holes. I do not intend to bore you with a history of phonology, detailing the yew-hew mergers and yod droppings. Suffice to say, these pesky spellings were once gilded permanently by the scholarly elite as a legacy to their archaic language origins. For your enjoyment.

Correct phonetic spellings replaced by absurd relics of imperialism

That enjoyment must be immense. Still today, in the 21st century, the Stickler Conspiracy, the Templar Knights of Spelling, the Orthographers Cult defend the cause. As we speak, term papers are being flung back at students faces, compositions are being defaced with red ink, volumes of copy are being sent back to the printer, marks are being deducted, machines are making suggestions, cell phones are making predictions, people are rifling through dictionaries, all because some English scholars thought it would be fun.

There have been efforts to change this. As early as the 1870s, in the heat of revolutionary gusto, the newly United States proposed a whopping 3500 English spelling corrections. That was eventually whittled down to a few hundred. When they realized how much work it was going to be to change everything, they decided to just go with a few “u”s being dropped and switch ‘lorry’ with ‘truck’. Besides, America had its own intellectual elite, and they didnt want to be left out of literary circles over a few “gh”s and silent “t”s.

America’s founding fathers no doubt discussing spelling reform

Here’s the problem I have with it. Historically valid or not, these spelling anomalies are culturally based. They are important to the English. Its their language, as they will remind you, and they can spell it any way they see fit. That might be all right for the English, but what does that have to do with me? Most people who speak English aren’t English. And those who are, aren’t even that English anyways. Most British people aren’t even English. I decree henceforth: Anyone who doesn’t identify themselves as English, is not subject to English cultural rites. They are therefore exempt from any archaic spellings. I even go as far as to propose that we call the language we speak by another name. The English may freely exercise their perfectly admirable and legitimate traditions as they need to. But let the domination of English culture upon others cease, and may we free ourselves.

As mad as that may sound, texters have already started. Many SMS users and online chatters by-pass the spelling suggestion doctrine hardwired into their devices. They have adopted a handier more efficient way of communicating. Academics routinely scoff at this so-called misuse of the language. But ultimately, out of reach of the hobbling tyranny of academics, it thrives. It goes by no other rules than common sense, efficiency and expediency. Through a series of acronyms, the cryptology even extends to body language and idiomatic expressions. In your face, English.

Do not wait for a leader to show you the way. Do not wait for the academic fossils to make it mainstream. Even if you are an adoptive speaker of English, this is your language. Use it as you wish. The point of a language is to communicate and be understood. So do whatever it takes to communicate better. Dropping archaic usages will save you time, free you from the binds of English Imperial domination and improve your life at the same time.

Post navigation

12 thoughts on “Spell Check This!”

Spelling rules are arbitrary, but, whether you like it or not, they’re part of the language. Mastering them is one mark of literacy, and failure to do so is one mark of illiteracy. It’s ugly but it’s true. Spelling, like vocabulary, sentence structure, and so on, is part of presenting yourself to the world as an educated person. It’s only one part, but still a part. Pretending otherwise harms everyone.

JH, Thank you for repeating the dogma that has been so thoroughly taught to us all. Even the avuncular tone is that of every public school teacher I have ever had. It is a useful tone, both lulling and reassuring. Also very useful for justifying such things as slavery in the 19th century and monarchy to this day. -That’s just the way it is, sonny, we don’t make the rules. *shrug*

Spelling doctrine may not be as unspeakable a human rights violation as servitude or feudalism, but it is just as archaic. It is complacency that keeps it where it is.

Have you read David Crystal: Txtng. The Gr8 Db8, Oxford University Press 2008? Not sure who exactly you had in mind, but I don’t think he’s an “academic fossil”😉
I think his point is really quite good: Txting unleashes a degree of creativity that traditional formats can’t, precisely because it’s a youth/subculture and the limitations on text length are there. My personal favorite is from a poem by Julia Bird quoted in this book:

Actually, the majority of the population of Britain is English. It is most certainly a living language and superbly hybrid. The main reason for having certain “rules” (particularly in education) isn’t to be dogmatic or pedantic, but to help with effective communications. Slang, text speak and other variations on the norm (The Queen’s English as we might say) can be a barrier to ensuring that others understand your meaning. Accurate spelling (and grammar) reflects a standard of professionalism which is important. Errors/idiosyncracies (take your pick) are not appropriate in formal communications (which includes academic work that is supposed to reflect a level of competence). You might not agree, but giving the right impression is something that a lot of people do care about – and should. Or we may as well all communicate in grunts and emoticons.

You make a good point. I agree that consistency is important for good communication. A standard model of the language would be a great idea. But until the language is effectively standardized (the Queens English is not the international standard BTW) to claim one dialect superior to another is in fact dogmatic. The slippery slope to grunting and emoticons as well as the value placed on “appropriate” usages and “professionalism” are all cultural constructions that reflect that oppression.
If effective communication is the goal, then why are we hanging on to archaic conventions and obsolete spelling that are less efficient? They may be important to the British, but they have nothing to do with the vast majority of non-British English speakers.
Assuming that the Queen’s English is the standard is a very clear expression of that oppression. Why not let English have a life of its own?

Brilliant article, I agree with you. Sometimes I think it’s the half-glass: full or empty situation. Personally really believe that the changes we’re currently going through will have a positive cleaning up effect on the English language which is dynamic -has been dynamic and always will be dynamic.

I have only just started thinking about this myself. After years of correcting grammar & spelling, I’m wondering why I have become a spelling freak.
Where is the teen who used to say to my Dad “I speak Australian”?
Where is the Uni student playing with words & poetry?
And now that I’m cyber with so many versions of spelling what does it matter?
Recently someone tweeted this by Stephen Fry and it did make me think about just that.
I feel sad that I remembered the spelling lessons better than the Creative Writing ones. What a disservice to my creative flow and how many other people have I stinted creativity in? Sad now😦
I realise my Dad who was also a stickler for pronunciation was only like that because they tried to stop him speaking Scottish in class and he was physically punished if he didn’t speak English properly.

Thanks for your post. The story of your dad really demostrates the point well. The examples are all around us. It always saddens me to see culture and identity used as a weapon of oppression. We value spelling and pronuncaition not because they are virtues, but because they are handy ways of measuring conformity.

"The more meaningful, the more deeply or elaboratively processed, the more situated in context, and the more rooted in cultural, background, metacognitive, and personal knowledge an event is, the more readily it is understood, learned, and remembered" Iran-Nejad, McKeachie, and Berliner

Pages

“If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning.”

-Frederick Douglass

Recent Posts

In 30 years of teaching kids rich and poor I almost never met a learning disabled child; hardly ever met a gifted and talented one either. Like all school categories, these are sacred myths, created by human imagination. They derive from questionable values we never examine because they preserve the temple of schooling.